Learning About Assumptions

Some of an instructor’s behaviors, actions, ideas,
and interactions with participants are likely to forward participants’
development, some such actions are likely to be ineffective, idiosyncratic
and not do anything at all, while some other actions may be detrimental to
the education process. To the inexperienced instructor, and even some
experienced instructors, it may not be clear to them which actions advance
the learning process for participants. The challenge for the
conscientious instructor is to conduct careful self-examination of his/her
involvement in an outdoor education program to try to elicit:

what assumptions he/she has, and to determine whether they are valid and
beneficial or invalid and detrimental,

what effect his/her actions have on the learning process for students and
whether alternative actions could have been more effective,

what effect his/her style has, and how this can be improved.

An instructor’s development in these respects can be
aided by experienced and knowledgeable program coordinators and members of
the human resource department who can be used as a resource and who can
provide critical feedback. Instructors can also look to accompanying
teachers, participants, and other instructors to help develop a more
effective instructional method. Such a process of self-examination
requires a certain level of maturity, humility, resilience, and dedication
on the part of the instructor. Progression will not occur without some
personal tension, resistance to change, and eventual adoption of improved
practices and beliefs.

An initial issue which the instructor faces are the
assumptions he/she holds. Assumptions can be a significant barrier or
alternatively a valuable aid in facilitating the person development of
participants. It is a natural human mental activity to be constantly
producing lay theories (assumptions) about why people do things and what
they think. These assumptions help us to predict how someone will react
if we do something, and so on. The problem is that acquiring assumptions
is an idiosynchratic, ad hoc process and although the assumptions may not
be correct they might become a habitual way of seeing of the world.
Nevertheless, these assumptions manifest in the way one interacts with
participants, designs programs, and so on. Therefore, it can be useful
for instructors to examine their assumptions about human behavior and
learning, and to explore other possibilities which may prove worthwhile.
For example, Handley (1994) lists his assumptions which are based on a
General Systems framework for solution focused intervention:

People experience problems as oppressive and desire for things to
be better.

Problems can be seen as occurring within the context of human
interaction. Problem patterns include both behavior and perceptions.
Both behaving differently and thinking differently are part of the process
of change.

People have tried to solve their problems, but the attempts failed
to bring the desired relief.

It is more helpful to consider, “what keeps this problem alive in
this person’s life, and keeps it from being resolved?” than “what caused
this problem?”.

People get stuck in interactional patterns or vicious cycles that
reflect their way of making sense of the situation, such that the problem
may be seen to “take on a life of it’s own”.

People have within them a wealth of resources...both known and
unknown to them.

The problem is the problem....the person is not the problem.

Change is constant and inevitable.

Every problem dominated pattern includes exceptions which serve as
hints towards a solution.

Complex problems don’t necessitate complex solutions.

Solution ideas or interventions work best when they fit the
client’s world view.

If it works, don’t fix it.

You don’t need to know what the problem is. It is more important
to know what will be different when the problem is solved.

Handley suggests that this set of assumptions is
beneficial for facilitating change with participants. Other assumptions
may interfere with an instructor’s work. Challenging personally-held
assumptions is difficult, particularly because assumptions mostly operate
unconsciously and manifest themselves insidiously in one’s beliefs and
actions. One method to get at held assumptions, and to experiment with
new assumptions, is to keep a diary during instructing outdoor education
programs. By noting down key educational decisions and reasons for each
decision, an instructor can map the experience and discover linkages
between decisions, interactions with participants, and outcomes. This
diary can also form the basis of post-course debriefing with other staff
and lead to further discussion, reading, and training for the instructor.

Having discussed assumptions in a general way, three
examples are provided here which are litmus tests of commonly occurring
problems which may result from questionable assumptions.

The first example is when an instructor operates
reasonably well with most participants, but has particular difficulty with
some participants or some staff. An instructor who has difficulty with a
participant or another staff member has a problem. In this sense it is
not the participant of the other staff member’s problem. The cause of
this problem for the instructor is quite likely to do with an assumption
or value-judgment that he/she has made. Identification and re-examination
of this assumption and then clear communication and testing of the false
assumption with the participant or other staff member can move towards
positive resolution, and thereby refocus energies back on positive
development. Pretending the problem doesn’t exist or ignoring it will at
best result in an ineffective experience for a participant and an
ineffective relationship with another staff member, or at worst, produce
destructive relationships.

A second common area of ineffectiveness is when an
instructor spends disproportionately more time with those participants
whom he/she gets along best with, and less time with those participants
who are not similar in personality or as socially adept or as motivated.
A more mature and effective instructor will tend to recognize that those
participants whom he/she gets along best with are probably the most able
to cope with experience and direct their own learning, while the less
positive participants require a greater level of intervention from the
instructor for the experience to be ‘translated’ and ‘reframed’ into terms
that are meaningful for them.

A third common area of inappropriate assumptions
resulting in ineffective experiences in effectiveness is poor
communication of the instructor’s role and handing over of
responsibility. The new instructor, excited by the possibilities of
experiential education, presents him/herself to participants in a
whirlwind of enthusiasm, then (mysteriously to participants) steps back
and does nothing, waiting for the ‘magic of experience’ to work. The
participants have not been ‘guided’ into experiential learning, and stand
around looking at each other, and muttering amongst themselves that the
program is a stupid exercise. Frustrated, the instructor then blames the
students for not taking any initiative or being motivated (rarely does the
instructor blame his/her poor initial assessment of the group’s
capabilities and failure to hand over of the experience in a guided
manner), and reacts by stepping in and taking over. Participants,
relieved that something is finally happening, then step back even further
and let themselves be carried along passively.

Difficulty with participants, spending too much time
with some participants, and inappropriate application of guided discovery
learning are three examples of the consequences of underlying assumptions
that instructors may be able to detect through self-examination and diary
recording of their educational approach and by seeking feedback from those
around them.